Case

The radar returns from a choppers blades will have a very very specific shape. Whereas the returns of an airplane will have a certain doppler shift cause by the line-of-sight velocity of the target and the targetting airplane, a chopper will look differently. The rotor blades are turning at a certain rpm and have a certain length. This means the rotor tips are moving with a certain velocity towards and away from the emitting airplane. Hence the radar returns will have line-of-sight doppler velocities from that certain velocity towards and away, added on top of the line-of-sight of the chopper itself. If the radar has enough power to refresh quickly enough it could actually make out each rotor blade as it turns around. It should be child's play to figure out how many blades the chopper has, if they are counterrotating like the Kamov or if it has a tail rotor like other choppers, and it might even figure out the orientation of the rotor axis.

This would be a very good idea, and several squadrons/server admins have already discussed the possibility of making a community mod pack that would suit the needs of most squadrons/servers while giving the client the option to join any server without having to change any files. At the moment there is not yet a clear consensus on what should be and what shouldn't be included in the mod. To keep the threshold for entering servers low, many servers are checking only local files. However, as time goes on we know which files need to be checked and which files can be modded, so I am confident a community mod pack will be made in the future.

Yes, if only we could include export.lua, though as has been noted before, this would be a serious security issue.

That could be. I am not entirely sure. If this is the file that sets the azimuth range so one can look further back, then yes, it probably is (at least it was in FC1.12). Yes, you can, as part of the mission file.

Good initiative Yoda! Can we also make a list of which files can be enforced upon clients through the mission? The ones I know of so far are: config/export/config.lua config/view/server.lua config/view/view.lua

It is already possible to disable live Tacview, exactly in the same way we did it in FC1.12. Unfortunately the only way to make it work is to make clients download customized export.lua and tacview.lua files, which raises the threshold for them to join any server that uses these. This would only work well with a community made mod. I would encourage any server admin that is not yet a member on the Community Round Table to join: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=50421

Couldn't agree more. The BS/FC2 combo now gives mission makers the options to get players to work together in a COOP environment. Take MBot's recent mission (http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=54111) as an example where Ka-50's need to mark targets for Su-25's. The targets are hard to see from high up, but rather easy to find with the Ka-50. Yesterday some of us flew this mission, with 7 of the 8 players being on our teamspeak server, both squad mates and people we had never met before. However, the mindset was exactly right to work together and have the Kamov's mark the targets while the Frogfoot's took them out. It was great!

Great work Vyrtuouz! For easy replaying of tracks, check this thread: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=53270 Later today I'll post two more batch scripts that allow you to switch between the Tacview enabled export.lua and the default export.lua. I use these scripts a lot, where I have short cuts on my desktop and can switch between one and the other in a single click.

In other words, be cool, don't be cool_t.

We had good fun with your mission MBot! The server quickly filled and we ended up with 7 out of the 8 pilots being on our TS server. The communication between the choppers and bombers was a necessity, because it was so incredibly hard for the Su-25's to pick up targets. It was great to be able to mark a target and guide them to it, advising them to use bombs, missiles or guns. Thank you for creating great missions!

So do I, but I can never materialize those idea's... :cry: Anyway, we're testing your mission now, anyone feel free to join. Look for the <51>COOP SERVER in the mission list.

Great work MBot! I'm a huge fan of your missions, and I hope missions like these can move the community a bit more towards COOP teamwork missions instead of the usual airquake missions. A while ago I did the same thing to trigger enemy opposition only when friendly fighters were around, but it is so hard to come up with a realistic mission scenario. Where do you get your idea's from?

Great work Grimes! All your effort working on the triggers and thinking out the procedures has paid off. Too bad some people feel differently.

Don't you just love attention to detail:

Check config/export/export.lua. It has some nice info on how to extract exported data and write it to a file. Be sure to set exports on in config/export/config.lua before doing tests.

Glad to hear you solved it! Now enjoy your debriefings and be amazed!

That doesn't matter, as that button is only for FC1.12. The recordings of ACMI's is completely separate from Tacview and should be set by changing config.lua, export.lua and the tacviewexportblackshark.lua files. If Topol posts his here we can check what might be wrong.

Topol, please post the following files from your machine: * config/export/export.lua * config/export/config.lua * config/export/tacviewexportblackshark.lua

We haven't seen them on the 51st server since we made the append->insert fix.

Yes and now. They would break off and engage you, but they would hunt you down to the end of the Earth, and then return to their waypoints regardless where the transports would be.

No, the task you give planes also sets how they behave. There are big differences between giving a plane the task of escorting, doing CAP, fightersweep or intercept.

What can I say... :thumbup:

So killing one's enemies enemy is also allowed? EDIT: Apologies for being a wise-ass... had too much to drink

To get back on topic... I can't really see how tables representing the motion can be used at all, as there is the variable user input to deal with. To me the "flying on rails" expression seems more likely due to simplifications of the flight model, where (parts of) physical processes are left out for the sake of computational ease. I understand the need for tables describing drag and left as a function of Mach and AoA, but the fact that, for example, a knife edge pass isn't modelled correctly is not due to the fact that the table is wrong, it is due to the fact that that physical process, i.e. the dependency of drag and lifts on roll, wasn't part of the table in the first place.

That is what I was trying to convey to you. Thanks GG.